‘If he doesn’t know the answer to that fundamental question I’d say we really need to pause this until we find out,’ a senior CNN editor warned
Senior CNN editor Tom Lumley sounded the alarm: Chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt’s story accusing Navy veteran Zachary Young of charging “exorbitant amounts” to evacuate Afghans fleeing their home was “full of holes like Swiss cheese” and suggested killing it entirely.
Lumley sent numerous CNN staffers messages complaining about Marquardt’s article, warning that it wasn’t ready. Then national security reporter Nicole Gaouette chimed in.
“It is probably seriously expensive to arrange and pay for the informers fixers, security people, drivers, plane tickets etc that it would take to get people out of Afghanistan right now. So the inference running through Alex’s story that these people are just bilking desperate Afghans for their money might not be fair at all,” she wrote in a Nov. 12, 2021, email. “Zachary Young comes across as being a but [sic] brutal, but he could just be stating facts: this is what it costs. It would be great to talk to well-known groups and ask them what it costs them to get someone out of Afghanistan right now.”
The story’s video segment, which Lumley said he wasn’t responsible for, had already aired on The Lead with Jake Tapper the day before. The written portion was published Nov. 13, 2021, and, like the video, singled out Young.
Now, Young is suing CNN for defamation, seeking $1 billion in damages. He alleges that the far-left network’s reporting irreparably harmed his reputation and destroyed his business, Nemex Enterprises, by asserting that he operated in an illegal “black market” to “profiteer” off Afghans desperate to flee their home as the Taliban took control. In court proceedings last week, the jury seemed open to forcing the far-left network to shell out the 10-figure payout. And expert witnesses testified that Young could have charged even higher prices.
Jurors on Tuesday were shown a trove of messages from Lumley and other senior editors criticizing Marquardt’s article, describing drafts as “infernal,” “pretty flawed,” and “shitty.” Despite the criticism, however, Lumley stood by its final version and said he would publish the same story again.
The jury was also shown video depositions of several CNN staffers, including anchor Jake Tapper, saying the liberal network shouldn’t have apologized. In fact, Young testified last week that Tapper never did since anchor Pamela Brown was filling in when the apology was issued.
Tapper was asked during his deposition how many people watch his show. “I do not pay attention to ratings,” he said. Last year, he boasted on X that one of his programs “had the highest ratings” in a key demographic.
Even before the November 2021 segment aired, Lumley cast doubts on Marquardt’s story. He later flagged a “fundamental question about the whole story.”
“One major thing not clear to me. Do any of the people who pay these guys actually get out of the country?” Lumley asked. “I think we need a graf to explain. Is this all totally hopeless?”
“I have sent back edits and a fundamental question about the whole story I don’t understand from Alex’s write and the TV script,” he wrote later. “If he doesn’t know the answer to that fundamental question I’d say we really need to pause this until we find out.”
He also called it an “infernal story” and said it “is still very much not ready for prime time.”
“I might even argue that this is pretty flawed and we should consider forgoing the write and just having the video programmed,” Lumley added.
After the segment aired, Lumley called the article “a mess” and said, “I’m not even sure it’s easily salvageable.” He described it as a “shitty urgent” story that he was trying to recast into “something sensible.”
Lumley told CNN senior breaking editor Megan Trimble the story “is full of holes like Swiss cheese.”
“Agree — the story is 80% emotion, 20% obscured fact,” she replied.
Lumley also told CNN senior editor Fuzz Hogan, one of the staffers who approved Marquardt’s story, he wanted to publish “something to defuse drama.”
“I also think it’s a half good story,” Lumley added. “We should have carried on and reported it out more.” He said the video was a good watch, but he had “too many outstanding questions” on the written portion.
Hogan responded: “Right. It feels like a good character, but he only got 3/4 of the way toward the larger.”
Marquardt was promoted after the story ran. During his testimony Monday, Marquardt bragged about his Emmy awards and refused to apologize to Young. Lumley—and several other CNN staffers—also refused Tuesday.
“Why should I be sorry?” he said. “There’s nothing for me to be sorry about.”
CNN faced several setbacks during Tuesday’s court proceedings, as well. An expert witness for the network didn’t want photos or videos taken of him since he works in war zones and wanted to keep his image concealed. He dropped out after the judge ruled against the request.
In earlier proceedings, the jury saw a message CNN producer Michael Conte sent saying Young had a “punchable face.” He stood by that description in his deposition shown Tuesday.
Several other depositions showed CNN employees erroneously defining “black market”—a term central to Young’s defamation claims—as an “unregulated market.” Dictionary definitions, however, specifically describe a “black market” as an illegal trade.
A CNN lawyer also had his phone confiscated after it went off during court proceedings.
Read the full article here
